that is pathetic the main account only had one game that wasn't full of his friends and or other accounts

I'm confused. The games had a variety of winners and draws as if they were playing legitimately. What the heck?

It looks to me like either a couple of players with multiple accounts helping each other to solos and draws, or one player with many accounts helping his primary account. Two of the players in this game didn't talk much, so it might well be the latter. I just don't get it. How can you ever think you won anything when you rig the game in your favor? It seems self-defeating.

How about that apology, G-Man? I presume that you have had enough time to sift through all of my games looking for a particular player. In all of my time on this site, I've made that accusation only once, and I apologized sincerely when Oli told me I was wrong.

As I told you in the game, after being berated by you and called an asshole, crazy, paranoid, insane... over and over, both privately and publicly, merely for seeing your inability to work with me on any front against any common foe as more the position of an enemy, than a friend, it is you who owe me an apology many times over. You gave up any rights to common courtesy with your verbal abuse, berating messages, and deliberate choice to not ready your moves, builds, and retreats until the full 7-day phase had passed, even though Germany stopped his tasteless commentary as a result.

Also, I only said I wanted to see how many games you and Spain had played in together and that I wouldn't be surprised if you guys had been allies helping each other in previous games before. And I only said after you were being a jerk and I said it to your face on public press. And guess what, you guys have been on the same side of a draw in four out of the five games you've played in together (in the fifth, one of you was eliminated). So, don't you think there was a bit of favoritism on both your parts in your choice of allies?, particularly in how you exchanged press from other powers early on in the game? Spain particularly passed up a number of opportunities to better his position in order to help your position.

Oh, and we played in the 2nd Known World game together, where your initial allies turned on you immediately for many of the same reasons.

I think it's known that I'm not always eye to eye with gopher, but I will say that he is not a person who would metagame in that fashion. Amby also falls into that category. As a person who has been playing with both of them several times in the past, I can't imagine that the two of them would ever do something of that nature.

Isn't it possible that they're both just really good players?

I checked after you made the accusation. We had not played together in over a year and we were enemies in the two previous games that I checked. You publicly accused us of cheating. You have had time to check. There is a world of difference between anything that I said about you and publicly questioning my honor. Being in games that were drawn is hardly the same thing as being allies. I'm honestly not sure whether we have ever allied together on this site. You made a verifiable public accusation besmirching the personal honor of two other players. You should either admit that you were wrong and publicly apologize or address your accusations to the mods.

As for the other crap you are throwing, you lied directly to both of us. Of course, we then did not trust you after that. And for the record in the Known World game, I was allied with Arabia and Egypt. Arabia just kept flipping alliances and eventually settled on you because he had burned his bridges with everyone else, as he admitted rather readily. Egypt viewed me as the preferable ally.

And how is it that you know that I sent Amby my correspondence with you? Did I not tell you? Did I not do so immediately? You were lying to us and we knew that you were lying to us. I told you that we knew that you were lying to us in the hope that you would stop playing such games and work with us honestly. It is still staggering to me that you still believe that you were some how victimized. I never lied to you. I never attacked you. I never plotted against you with others. You did all of those things against me, seemingly constantly. It is you who failed to work with us even as we tried to work with you. And yes, you are paranoid. You are so incredibly and pathologically dishonest that you project such dishonesty onto others. Does it not sink in that the only people that you could work with were the cheaters? If memory serves, you bragged about how easily you got along with them....and how you found a natural commonality and easy working relationship with each of them. And I apologize if I'm confusing you with Germany, but someone in the game accused me of meta-gaming with Raro, which is obviously little more than the ravings of a deranged mind.

But it seems you aren't a classy enough person to admit when you are clearly wrong in matter that deserve such admissions.

Italy was nice to me as Spain. Meanwhile Germany and Britain were pains in the you know where. Egypt wasn't trustworthy in the least. For the record France also was trustworthy (at the time). And wait for it.... as a result I allied with Italy and France. So really its not who the player was, but how they communicated with me and stayed true to that communication (which is why I had a love/hate relatioinship with Egypt.)

That same trait has happened in other games gopher's been in. It's also... bit of a news flash here... drumroll... a trait that other players use on me. And guess what? As a result I tend to ally with them too!!!!

And for the record, some of them do me over, and sometimes I do them over... I've stabbed gopher at least twice in this fashion ;-)

Gopher, I don't know how you can say that characterizing someone repeatedly as an asshole, crazy, paranoid, is not at least on the same level as saying I wanted to see how many games you and Spain had played in together and that I wouldn't be surprised if you guys had been allies helping each other in previous games before. For the record, I never accused you of cheating, you only ranted that I did. I accused you of favoritism. Somehow, you seemed to know who he was from the first move in an anonymous game and both of you seemed to only want to work with each other, even though it was a bad deal for Spain. And when you call someone an asshole, crazy, and paranoid, you are attacking their character and honor. So, after you went out of your way to berate me and insult me in this manner 25+ times, you gave up your right not to be attacked this way. And I heard a lot of other things about how difficult and high maintenance you are from other players in that Known World game.

Also, it was Spain who stabbed me three times over. First, he said he would support me to LIB and didn't. Then he said he would not attack TUN and did. And then he said he would not attack LIB and did. If you look at the moves on the board, this is pretty clear. You don't move three forces from Spain towards Egypt, not attack Italy, and then say you were the victim. I didn't lie to Spain until the very last move in the game, and that was just a measure payback. I only lied to you well after it became apparent that you would not work with me in any capacity even though we had multiple common enemies, because yes, by then I wanted to take you out! (This is Diplomacy, right?).

And you told me I couldn't work with anyone, but now you're saying I worked with cheaters? First, I managed one move with Poland near the endgame, since it was the only way to keep Ukraine off of me and not perish, and then I managed two moves with Germany in the endgame solely to eliminate you. Second, I didn't know they were cheating. Third, I worked with Ukraine and Russia in the early game and Ukraine in the late game. And I never bragged about anything. What I said was that you were the ONLY person I've ever had to mute and that your continuous barrage of insults and berrating messages was unacceptable. And that deliberately obstructing the game by never readying your orders while insulting people on the message boards all week long was insulting to all of us after Germany changed the tone of his commentary as you had said was your goal. Finally, Germany was the one that accused you of meta-gaming with Turkey.

You made verifiable statements. They were wrong. At the very least, as a matter of decency, you owe apologies. You accused other players of cheating. They were not. That would be the clue for an upstanding person to apologize. I'm not asking you to apologize for calling me an asshole. I'm asking you to apologize for calling Amby a cheat. You can still think me an asshole.....hell, I even gave you a forum thread to shout it until you are blue in the face. I do not believe that you perceive the world as it really is. If paranoia is too strong of a word to describe that, then I should have been more careful with your delicate feelings. And for the record, you were lying to me and conspiring against me from the very beginning. I do not know whether you are lying now to me or to yourself.....or just to everyone else.

But I do just have to ask, how exactly did Germany's tone in his commentary change? My memory is of him becoming even more scatological.

I seem to remember repeated assertions that you were just waiting for the end of the game so that you could mute me forever. That doesn't seem to have happened, now does it?

Does either Gopher or Gman want to copy and paste the chat log between them that game?

I didn't accuse anyone of cheating! I said I wouldn't be surprised if you two were allies helping each other in previous games before. And you guys have in fact been allies in previous games before who appeared to all to favor each other from the get-go in this game. And I never called you an asshole or insulted you in any way for that manner, despite all the insults and berating messages you continuously sent my way. I only characterized your play as poor.

I don't care how you think I perceive the world, but if you want to tell me how you do, you should have had the decency to do it politely and respectfully, and not over and over and over again. And this came about because you were claiming I should look on our relationship favorably, when in fact you could not find anyway to work with me on any front vs. common enemies, which is why I characterized you as more of an enemy than a friend in the first place, and someone not worthy of my trust -- which is what you initially began harping that I was crazy, paranoid, out-of-touch with reality... about.

And making different offers to different players is not the same as lying. If Spain had taken me up on those offers and they were carried out, then you could say I was lying. But because you and he traded press from other players right away in an anonymous game, you knew I made you both different offers, and thus characterize me as lying. But I had every intention of following through on my offers to Spain, as I tried, when he stabbed me to help you with TUN. And at the outset, I tried to work with you, but as any of the other players in that game except Spain will tell you, you made yourself impossible to work with.

After you deliberately obstructed the game by not readying your orders for all moves, builds, and retreats, letting the entire week-long phase go by while chatting up every comment on the message boards when everyone else had readied their orders, Germany stopped making his pointed snipes for quite a few months, but you just continued to purposely obstruct the game even though you said your point was to get Germany to stop. And I did mute you from Feb - May, stopping all your insults in private press. And I have blocked you so that I never have the misfortune to play another game with you again, which is a shame, because I did enjoy your play. But your continuous barrage of insults and berating messages and deliberate obstruction of the game for 7 months to get back at one player you had a problem with, just made playing with you the worst Diplomacy experience I've ever had.

There's no honour amongst thieves

Oh, in the post I made at 8:04 on Spain stabbing me: his first stab was not to support me to TUN when he said he would (not LIB as I misstated in the post).

Seriously, the way to avoid having seven day phases is to not join games with seven day phases.

3 Apr 2012 (To: Global, from Egypt) - Spring, 2004: I'm guessing Spain and you have been in collusion for some time here at vDip. I'll be interested to see how many games the two of you have had an alliance in.

Now that can be easily checked. I counted at the time, and I think I found 5 common games. G-Man implied a pattern of collusion throughout our play on the site. I invite people to look through my games and tell me if they find a bunch of games with me and Amby and a pattern of us forming game long alliances. I have not counted but I'd speculate that most of our games together have either been test games for new variants or team games.

Of the 160 results I got searching for "ass" in the game the overwhelming majority directed at me were Germany. Clearly, I have conflated in my mind the conversations with the two players I was constantly bickering with. I have not read through all of the chatlog, but I remember challenging G-Man to name me after he said something about my having a universally negative reputation. I thought that he had phrased it "biggest asshole on the site, but clearly that exact phrasing is not the case.

@SA: The issue wasn't that Gopher took 7 days for every phase, the issue was that Gopher openly and intentionally would not ready orders for any phase, build, or retreat, even when he had nowhere to retreat to or only one unit, to get back at another player for a fight they had gotten into. I.e., he was punishing everyone to get back at one individual.

Remember that this was an anon game.

Obviously, I'm missing a close " after site.

Or three as the case may be.

Guessing there is a chance of collusion and being interested in seeing the stats is not the same as an accusation Gopher. Particularly after you were so rude, calling me names and berating me with how paranoid and crazy and out-of-touch with reality I was. And you guys made everybody wonder that, because you admitted to exchanging press from other powers on the opening moves and because Spain continually passed up better opportunities and positions in order to continually help you

A game of Diplomacy is like Vegas- what's said and done there stays there. Rebuking someone for lying in a game of diplomacy is like handing out speeding tickets at an indy-car speedway.

I think we're all glad that the game's over, and we can probably all admit to some level of shame for what took place there. I thought Egypt played the game well, and handled himself appropriately enough. If Italy sent some scrappy messages to him, then I'd consider it a normal game of Diplomacy. I did too- Egypt deceived at every opportunity until late in the game, after I had decided to swear sovereignty to Ukraine for my survival, which would come to no avail. I think gopher and G-man are both standard players, who use words to their utmost advantage to better their position in the game. I usually am too, but I thought with the high buy-in, I would try a more honest and subtle approach. Egypt was wise though, and sensed that confrontation was a foregone conclusion. At my first chance, I admit that I probably would've tried to knock him out. That's how I won my first modern game as Turkey. I can't blame him for taking the first strike. Nor should gopher blame him for any devious attempts at misdirection or espionage. These are the players you want to play against, in order to accept the nature of the game and not be distracted by personal implications of one's character.

As far as Egypt's assertion that the Italy/Spain alliance was bad for Spain, I think it was a foregone conclusion as soon as Germany and England entered the game. Once France was collapsing under the 'monopoly' force, I don't blame Italy and Spain for sharing all in order for their survival.

I also think Italy's unwillingness to advance the game was also understandable, though not condoned. He was facing a constant barrage of aggression on both the game-board and in the forum, and appeasement toward Germany offered little prospect of changing his situation. I speculate that IF HE HAD complied with Germany's insistence that he 'ready' immediately, then Germany would've swiftly soloed with the help of his legions. So, in a sense, Italy's slowing down of the pace is probably be responsible for the draw and the share of the pot that Egypt was awarded. It was the dialogue that was caused by Italy's interruption to the game that led to the international pressure for a draw. It was obvious that Germany still wanted a solo victory when he tried that embarrassing facade with a 'time-limit' for Poland's holding out on a draw. He gave himself up when he alluded to the possibility that Poland may not return, when after 9 months Poland had never given any reason to make such a speculation (as was pointed out by Ukraine).

I guess what I'm saying is that there's no use in begrudging someone for events that occurred in a long and exhausting game. This game was skewed in many ways: Russia's cd, Germany's inciting demeanor and the foolish and unfortunate mistake of bringing a social circle to an anonymous high-stakes game. The result was a group of discontented and frustrated players who let their emotions get the best of them.

It's important to remember that not all games are like that, and that typically with active and honest players, they usually remain fun and active. Keeping this in mind, I hope that G-Man doesn't keep gopher muted, so there's a chance we can all play again in a future game and once again test each others' skill.

Well said raro.

thx

@fasces
you dirty little devil

"you dirty little devil"
:D

+2 Raro, and I completely agree on the Indi analogy, though I disagree on the Spanish position, as the Ambassador could have taken me up on my offer to split the Med at many points and been one of the major players himself. And if he had done so early, we would have been the dominant powers in the game, as he admitted later. But this was never a possibility, as the Ambassador and Gopher seemed to married to each other from the opening and unwilling to consider other positions at all.

I also dont' think Gopher's unwillingness to advance the game was understandable, as he is punishing everyone for something he helped provoke from Germany, who was also wrong for crossing the line. But two wrongs don't make a right. Whether or not Germany would have won the game is irrelevant (even if he wasn't cheating).

In the spirit of good sportsmanship, I would normally just say it's all water under the bridge. But I was insulted, called a slew of names, and berated with Gopher's derogatory opinion of me so many times, I would have to have both a full apology, as well as a promise never to call other players names or degrade them continuously with his derogatory opinions of them in order to do that. And frankly, judging from the number of times Gohper insulted and berated me, and from his general low opinion of everyone in that game (except the Ambassador), as well as the fact that he's never even once indicated that he might have been (completely!) out of line, I don't think Gopher is capable of that and will thus block him from playing with me.